|
July 11, 2006
In a move pitting Texas cities against utility companies, Dallas Mayor Laura Miller and Houston Mayor Bill White have teamed up to urge mayors of other big cities to fight dirty technology proposed for 17 new coal-fired power plants in the state.
The plants are being fast-tracked through the state's pollution review process with the special blessing of Gov. Rick Perry. That process can typically take more than a year, but TXU Corp. aims to have 11 of its new coal-fired generating units operating within four years.
Miller sent a memo to 45-50 mayors of large Texas cities at the end of last week asking for $10,000 from each city to help hire a law firm to intervene before the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Houston's White has agreed to spearhead the effort, the letter states. It also says Houston and Dallas will handle organizational work and hiring of consultants.
Coal coming
Across Texas, seven power companies have applied to the TCEQ to build an unprecedented 17 new coal-fired power plants in Texas over the next few years. TXU is proposing 11 new generating units, all at existing power plant sites.
Many of the proposed power plants are near North Texas, including several around Waco in Central Texas and in Fannin County, northeast of Dallas. The largest is a 1,720 megawatt coal-fired power plant proposed by Dallas-based TXU Corp. in Robertson County, about 120 miles southeast of Dallas.
Emissions from those plants could further foul North Texas air, but whether they would add significant amounts of pollutants here is under debate. TXU has argued that the plants won't have a significant impact on North Texas air quality.
Emission concerns
Local political leaders fear the plants could add tons of pollution annually to North Texas, which already is losing a long-running battle to meet federal clean air standards.
In her letter, Miller cites figures that the new plants each year would spew: 30,000 tons of smog-producing nitrogen oxide, or NOx; more than 115 million tons of carbon dioxide, or CO2, which contributes to global warming; and nearly 4,000 pounds of toxic mercury.
Miller said she'd like to have at least 40 cities participate in order to raise the estimated legal and research costs of $300,000 to $500,000.
"Formal intervention means providing the TCEQ with thoughtful alternatives, expert testimony and sworn depositions of fact. This can be done, with the help of outside consultants who do this for a living," wrote Miller.
The goal isn't to have the permits denied, said Miller. Instead, the hope is to force the utility companies to use modern, clean technology, some of which could cut emissions by 60% to 90%, she said.
Frank Librio, Miller's chief of staff, said Miller garnered early support for the idea at a statewide global-warming summit last week hosted by Arlington Mayor Robert Cluck, a leading regional advocate of stemming global warming.
Back To Top
July 6, 2006
Georgia Tech researchers have created a new combustor (combustion chamber where fuel is burned to power an engine or gas turbine) designed to burn fuel in a wide range of devices — with next to no emission of nitrogen oxide (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO), two of the primary causes of air pollution. The device has a simpler design than existing state-of-the-art combustors and could be manufactured and maintained at a much lower cost, making it more affordable in everything from jet engines and power plants to home water heaters.
“We must burn fuel to power aircrafts and generate electricity for our homes. The combustion community is working very hard to find ways to burn the fuel completely and derive all of its energy while minimizing emissions,” said Dr. Ben Zinn, Regents’ professor, the David S. Lewis Jr. Chair in Georgia Tech’s Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering and a key collaborator on the project. “Our combustor has an unbelievably simple design, and it would be inexpensive to make and inexpensive to maintain.”
Attaining ultra low emissions has become a top priority for combustion researchers as federal and state restrictions on pollution continuously reduce the allowable levels of NOx and CO produced by engines, power plants and industrial processes.
Called the Stagnation Point Reverse Flow Combustor, the Georgia Tech device significantly reduces NOx and CO emissions in a variety of aircraft engines and gas turbines that burn gaseous or liquid fuels. It burns fuel with NOx emissions below 1 parts per million (ppm) and CO emissions lower than 10 ppm, significantly lower than emissions produced by other combustors.
The project’s initial goal was to develop a low emissions combustor for aircraft engines and power-generating gas turbines that must stably burn large amounts of fuel in a small volume over a wide range of power settings (or fuel flow rates). But the design can be adapted for use in a variety of applications, including something as large as a power generating gas turbine or as small as a water heater in a home.
“We wanted to have all the clean-burning advantages of a low temperature combustion process while burning a large amount of fuel in a small volume,” Zinn said.
The combustor burns fuel in low temperature reactions that occur over a large portion of the combustor. By eliminating all high temperature pockets through better control of the flow of the reactants and combustion products within the combustor, the device produces far lower levels of NOx and CO and avoids acoustic instabilities that are problematic in current low emissions combustors.
To reduce emissions in existing combustors, fuel is premixed with a large amount of swirling air flow prior to injection into the combustor. This requires complex and expensive designs, and the combustion process often excites instabilities that damage the system.
But Georgia Tech’s design eliminates the complexity associated with premixing the fuel and air by injecting the fuel and air separately into the combustor while its shape forces them to mix with one another and with combustion products before ignition occurs.
The project was funded by the NASA University Research Engineering Technology Institute (URETI) Center on Aeropropulsion and Power and Georgia Tech. The primary investigators on the project were Professors Ben T. Zinn, Yedidia Neumeier, Jerry Seitzman and Jeff Jagoda from the School of Aerospace Engineering, and Visiting Research Engineers Yoav Weksler and Ben Ami Hashmonay.
Back To Top
July 5, 2006
HOUSTON, July 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Reliant Energy today announced plans to install state-of-the-art emission control systems at two Pennsylvania power plants, a major step in the company's strategy for maximizing the long- term value of its power generation assets while reducing air emissions. Reliant Energy has estimated it could spend up to $625 million through 2011 on sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and mercury controls at the company's power plants.
The plans announced today call for the installation of a wet flue gas desulfurization system, or scrubber, at the company's Cheswick Generating Station in Springdale, Pa., and for funding Reliant's portion of the scrubber installation at the Keystone Generating Station near Indiana, Pennsylvania. Reliant jointly owns the Keystone station with six other entities and operates the facility on behalf of the owners.
Reliant estimates that its cost for the Cheswick scrubber and its portion of the Keystone project will be approximately $350 million. The scrubbers at both facilities are expected to begin commercial operation in 2009. These capital expenditures will be made over time with the majority being incurred from 2007 to 2009.
Installation of scrubbers at these units will remove approximately 98 percent of SO2 from the stations' flue gases, reducing Reliant Energy's SO2 emissions by approximately 68,000 tons per year. The systems will also be designed to maximize the removal of mercury.
"Reliant Energy is committed to caring for the environment and the communities where we do business, and this decision is significant from both perspectives," said Reliant Energy Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Joel Staff. "Investing in scrubbers on these units will contribute to improved air quality in Pennsylvania while improving the economic viability of these units for years to come. Not only is it the right thing to do for the environment, it makes good business sense."
In addition to the installation of scrubbers at the Cheswick and Keystone plants, the strategy includes upgrades to the existing flue gas desulfurization systems at Reliant's Elrama and Niles plants. These upgrades will be completed this year and are expected to increase SO2 removal efficiency. Modifications to significantly reduce SO2 emissions from Reliant Energy's Avon Lake facility are also being considered.
Reliant also continues to evaluate technologies that contribute to reduced SO2 and NOx emissions. For SO2 control, the company is testing switching to low-sulfur fuels, including Power River Basin coal. In addition, Reliant is considering installation of selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) systems for NOx reduction. These technologies hold promise as a mechanism for cost effectively reducing emissions at smaller facilities.
As part of this comprehensive plan for controlling emissions, Reliant continues its work with third-parties to host testing and development of new emission-control technologies, including advanced sorbents for mercury control, lime slurry injection and new duct injection technology for SO2 control, and waste coal slurry reburn for NOx control.
Reliant Energy, Inc. (NYSE: RRI - News) based in Houston, Texas, provides electricity and energy services to retail and wholesale customers in the United States. In Texas, the company provides service to approximately 1.9 million retail electricity customers, including residential, small business and commercial, industrial, governmental and institutional customers. Reliant also serves commercial, industrial, governmental and institutional customers in the PJM (Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland) market.
The company is one of the largest independent power producers in the nation with approximately 16,000 megawatts of power generation capacity across the United States. These strategically located generating assets utilize natural gas, fuel oil and coal. For more information, visit http://www.reliant.com/corporate .
This news release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements are statements that contain projections, estimates and assumptions about our revenues, income, earnings and other financial items, our plans and objectives for the future, future economic performance, or other projections or estimates about our assumptions relating to these types of statements. These statements usually relate to future events and anticipated revenues, earnings, business strategies, competitive position or other aspects of our operations or operating results. In many cases you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as "anticipate," "estimate," "believe," "continue," "could," "intend," "may," "plan," "potential," "predict," "should," "will," "expect," "objective," "projection," "forecast," "goal," "guidance," "outlook", "effort", "target" and other similar words. However, the absence of these words does not mean that the statements are not forward-looking. We have based our forward-looking statements on management's beliefs and assumptions based on information available to management at the time the statements are made. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements as a result of many factors or events, including legislative and regulatory developments, the outcome of pending lawsuits, governmental proceedings and investigations, the effects of competition, financial market conditions, access to capital, the timing and extent of changes in commodity prices and interest rates, weather conditions, changes in our business plan and other factors we discuss in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including "Risk Factors" discussed in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, Item 1A. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of the particular statement, and we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
Back To Top
June 23, 2006
Georgia Tech researchers have created a new combustor (combustion chamber where fuel is burned to power an engine or gas turbine) designed to burn fuel in a wide range of devices — with next to no emission of nitrogen oxide (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO), two of the primary causes of air pollution. The device has a simpler design than existing state-of-the-art combustors and could be manufactured and maintained at a much lower cost, making it more affordable in everything from jet engines and power plants to home water heaters.
“We must burn fuel to power aircrafts and generate electricity for our homes. The combustion community is working very hard to find ways to burn the fuel completely and derive all of its energy while minimizing emissions,” said Dr. Ben Zinn, Regents’ professor, the David S. Lewis Jr. Chair in Georgia Tech’s Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering and a key collaborator on the project. “Our combustor has an unbelievably simple design, and it would be inexpensive to make and inexpensive to maintain.”
Attaining ultra low emissions has become a top priority for combustion researchers as federal and state restrictions on pollution continuously reduce the allowable levels of NOx and CO produced by engines, power plants and industrial processes.
Called the Stagnation Point Reverse Flow Combustor, the Georgia Tech device significantly reduces NOx and CO emissions in a variety of aircraft engines and gas turbines that burn gaseous or liquid fuels. It burns fuel with NOx emissions below 1 parts per million (ppm) and CO emissions lower than 10 ppm, significantly lower than emissions produced by other combustors.
The project’s initial goal was to develop a low emissions combustor for aircraft engines and power-generating gas turbines that must stably burn large amounts of fuel in a small volume over a wide range of power settings (or fuel flow rates). But the design can be adapted for use in a variety of applications, including something as large as a power generating gas turbine or as small as a water heater in a home.
“We wanted to have all the clean-burning advantages of a low temperature combustion process while burning a large amount of fuel in a small volume,” Zinn said.
The combustor burns fuel in low temperature reactions that occur over a large portion of the combustor. By eliminating all high temperature pockets through better control of the flow of the reactants and combustion products within the combustor, the device produces far lower levels of NOx and CO and avoids acoustic instabilities that are problematic in current low emissions combustors.
To reduce emissions in existing combustors, fuel is premixed with a large amount of swirling air flow prior to injection into the combustor. This requires complex and expensive designs, and the combustion process often excites instabilities that damage the system.
But Georgia Tech’s design eliminates the complexity associated with premixing the fuel and air by injecting the fuel and air separately into the combustor while its shape forces them to mix with one another and with combustion products before ignition occurs.
The project was funded by the NASA University Research Engineering Technology Institute (URETI) Center on Aeropropulsion and Power and Georgia Tech. The primary investigators on the project were Professors Ben T. Zinn, Yedidia Neumeier, Jerry Seitzman and Jeff Jagoda from the School of Aerospace Engineering, and Visiting Research Engineers Yoav Weksler and Ben Ami Hashmonay.
Back To Top
June 19, 2006
Cummins Inc. has announced the production launch of the KTA38GC gas compression driver and a new KTA19GC 1200 rpm rating for the oil and gas market. The new KTA38GC is the next step on the horsepower ladder for Cummins in the gas compression market, while the 1200-rpm KTA19GC provides additional application opportunities for Cummins highly successful 19-liter engine.
Cummins KTA38GC features ratings from 710 to 850 hp ranges in a Simple Lean-Burn (SLB) configuration and ratings from 635 to 760 hp in a catalyst configuration. The SLB configuration is a two-gram NOx-output-capable engine that provides great performance and clean engine-out emissions. The 38-liter V12 KTA38GC is designed for wellhead gathering and related gas compression applications.
The engine utilizes many of the same extremely durable internal components such as the block, crankshaft, camshaft and connecting rods used in Cummins proven K38 diesel engine. This parts commonality provides a distinct advantage for the operator in terms of the proven reliability and long life of the components, familiar servicing and parts availability.
Reliability and serviceability of the KTA38GC are further enhanced through the use of non-wastegated turbochargers, Cummins air/fuel ratio control, and 4-valve cylinder heads designed to provide rapid and highly accurate valve adjustment capability.
The 1200-rpm rating for KTA19GC, Cummins 19-liter displacement, rich-burn engine designed for wellhead gathering and related gas compression applications, is available in a catalyst configuration and also offers a shielded CSA ignition as an option. The KTA19GC produces 265 hp and 1160 pound-feet of torque at 1200 rpm and brings a new power option to the oil and gas markets -- a power option based on 20 years of proven KTA19 durability.
Since 2001, Cummins has built upon a series of engines designed to provide outstanding value and technology backed by terrific customer support for the oil and gas market," said Mark Levett, vice-president and general manager of Cummins High Horsepower Engine Business. "We've continued to invest in proven products, proven technology, people and infrastructure to serve our customers better than anyone else.
By taking into account the needs of customers, incorporating those needs into our highly reliable products and backing the products with an industry-leading service support network, we continue to gain the respect of the industry and more of our customers' business," he added.
Cummins, a global power leader, is a corporation of complementary business units that design, manufacture, distribute and service engines and related technologies, including fuel systems, controls, air handling, filtration, emission solutions and electrical power generation systems. Headquartered in Columbus, Indiana, Cummins serves customers in more than 160 countries through its network of 550 company-owned and independent distributor facilities and more than 5,000 dealer locations.
Back To Top
June 19, 2006
Anderson-based I Power Energy Systems, LLC is today launching a new natural gas-fueled, industrial engine, which is designed for extended-duty applications that require very low exhaust emissions.
The company says the engine can be used for several applications including agricultural irrigation pumps and mechanical chillers.
Source: Inside INdiana Business
ANDERSON, Ind., June 19 -- I Power Energy Systems, LLC, announced today the introduction of a new, 120 Horsepower, natural gas-fueled, industrial engine, designed for extended-duty applications requiring ultra-low exhaust emissions. Highly efficient emissions components and software incorporated into the new engine are based upon the company's Greenergy(TM) Technology, developed for a full range of products from their traditional continuous-duty, on-site, power generators to numerous industrial, agricultural and commercial engine applications.
I Power's Greenergy(TM) Technology is based on a systems engineering approach that combines induction system refinements, combustion chamber re- design, optimized air-fuel mixing, exhaust flow control and treatment and a power electronic engine controller incorporating a proprietary software tailored to meet specific application requirements.
I Power's current line of electric generation units consistently demonstrates low emissions, compliant with the strictest air pollution control districts requirements. The engines produce less then 0.05g/hp-hr of Nox and less than 0.60g/bhp-hr of CO. "This improvement alone provides for a 300% cleaner engine than engines being permitted for use in California today, removing several tons of Nox emissions annually per engine. That reduction is equivalent to the emissions produced by more than 12 of today's passenger cars," noted I Power President Terry Pahls.
Director of Business Development for I Power, John F. Welch, Jr., stated, "This package is a good fit for multiple applications, especially agricultural irrigation pumps and mechanical chillers. We have an ongoing commitment to low-emissions technology and are today meeting the strictest California emissions guidelines on our test stands. Our new ENP 8.1 well pump is a perfect example of an I Power product meeting the market's need for low emissions and highly efficient power."
I Power Energy Systems, LLC, designs and manufactures full-time, on-site power generation systems that can utilize multi-fuel energy sources to produce efficient electricity in tandem with or independent of the utility grid systems. When combined with an innovative exhaust heat recovery system and proprietary controller technologies, the I Power distributed power units offer maximum efficiencies and attractive energy alternatives for consumer markets.
More information is available on the company's website: http://www.IpowerES.com .
Back To Top
By Robert Davis
June 5, 2006
Does variation of the inaccuracy of a calibration gas really matter all that much?
Utilities today can implement a number of different initiatives to help them contain costs and maximize profits. Some of those, such as switching to a more efficient fuel source if possible, can produce obvious results that are relatively easy to calculate. But there are other initiatives, though less obvious, that can produce significant results at the bottom line. One such cost-containment initiative involves evaluating something professionals might never think to consider: their choice of continuous emission monitoring (CEM) protocol calibration gases.
In 2003, the EPA conducted a blind audit in which they purchased (from an electrical power plant) new cylinders of protocol calibration gases that were produced by various suppliers of specialty gases. The EPA then sent the cylinders to a third-party analytical laboratory where they were analyzed against National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards, generally regarded as supplying the most accurate metrological standards available. The first results of the audit showed substantial variations in the accuracy of the protocol gases tested. Some of the gases were off by 8 percent. EPA audit results have been posted on their website: www.epa.gov/airmarkets/monitoring/calgasauditpassfail.xls.
Does variation of the inaccuracy of a calibration gas really matter all that much? More than one might think. This is all the more true when considering the issue of emissions credits. Suppose a facility has an inaccurate calibration gas that was either improperly prepared or has degraded while in the cylinder, so that the accuracy is less than what is stated on the tag (tag value). Admittedly, the facility may still be in the clear regarding actual compliance: the tag specifies ±2-percent accuracy, which is the minimum that the EPA requires. So unless the cylinder certification has expired, the facility has every reason to believe that tag value is correct.
But considering the EPA’s audit results, it is possible that the cylinder’s contents may not match the tag. When an environmental calibration gas goes bad, it does so in a manner that results in CEM calibration on the “too-sensitive side,” when a facility uses this gas to calibrate its CEM, it will report inflated emissions values. Therefore, the facility is in danger of overstating the number of tons of SO2, NOX, CO2, or VOCs emitted, thus losing tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in emission credits, all due to one inaccurate calibration gas.
Consider the case of a coal-fired power plant in the state of New Jersey that emits 10,700 tons of SO2 per year. If their CEM is calibrated using a gas whose accuracy is off by 1 percent, the facility is incorrectly measuring and therefore overstating, their SO2 emissions. How does this seemingly small error translate to the power plant’s bottom line? Based on SO2 credits valued at approximately $1,000/ton, the overstatement will cost the utility $107,000 worth of emissions credits it could have banked or traded (1 percent of 10,700 = 107 tons x $1,000/ton of SO2). Making matters worse, since a CEM is essentially an SO2/NOX/VOC billing meter for both credit trading and tax purposes, the utility will pay inflated Title V emission fees to the tune of $81/ton. That is an additional unnecessary expense of $8,667. All the while the plant would remain in compliance with EPA regulations for uncertainty, but the combined hidden loss would be $115,667.
The above example suggests an inaccuracy error of a mere 1 percent. But suppose the plant was unfortunate enough to use a gas that was off by 8 percent; the potential loss in unclaimed emission credits and unnecessary taxes would be much higher.
New trading requirements such as the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), California Reclamation Rules, the Highly Reactive Volatile Organic Rule (in the greater Houston area), the potential CO2 Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI, and others add even more weight to the issue of accuracy. The increased demand for emissions measurement will place increasing focus on accurate measurement and instrument calibration. And that can’t happen without accurate calibration gases. The potential for millions more dollars in lost emissions credits, entirely due to bad protocol calibration gases, is staggering.
The hidden cost of inaccurate protocol calibration also can result in purchasing expensive materials that are entirely unnecessary. If a facility is using an SCR or an SNCR system to reduce NOX emission, and it is injecting ammonia, potential costs can go higher still. Ammonia is injected at rates that are based on the readings from an NOX inlet monitor. If the inlet monitor is inaccurately calibrated by bad calibration gas, it will detect NOX levels that are higher than the plant NOX emissions allowance and will trigger ammonia injection. Every ppm of NOX that is incorrectly read can result in spending tens of thousands of dollars on unnecessary ammonia or urea. As an example, in a natural gas turbine application with an SCR system, a 1-ppm error can result in injecting excess ammonia that, at today’s price, is worth over $30,000/year.
There are also less dramatic, though still substantial ways a company can reduce cost and avoid unnecessary expenses. With leading gas suppliers that offer Internet and IP technology-driven e-tools, facilities can pare down administrative and managerial expenses.
Tracking cylinder expiration is a good example. When a protocol cylinder reaches the expiration date shown on its Certificate of Analytical Accuracy, the contents can no longer be trusted to remain within 2 percent of the listed tag value. Under EPA guidelines, it is no longer compliant with test methods for emissions. If the cylinder retains enough gas pressure (500 psi) the facility might return it to the manufacturer for possible recertification. However, a way to avoid this problem altogether is to have the gas supplier automatically notify customers before a cylinder expires, and also warn customers each time a cylinder in their inventory expires so they won’t continue using it.
It is now also possible to obtain Certificates of Analytical Accuracy and MSDS documentation online. These documents are important for test verification and completion of most Part 60 tests. The ability to produce documentation when needed can save hours of frustration and organization. Gas suppliers can provide Internet access to detailed historical data that includes cylinder certificates, contents, ship and pickup dates. Facilities looking to contain costs should take a hard look at something they cannot see with the naked eye: the accuracy of the protocol gases used to calibrate their CEMs, and the services provided by the supplier who produces them.
Back To Top
|
BACT Resources, Inc. - News